National Anarchism Illogical (Newbie Issues)

by anarchistalex , Australia, Sunday, November 11, 2007, 03:58 @ Domini nulli

» It is difficult to see the logic in this brand of 'anarchism'.

Actually, I think most of us already agree with national anarchism in one way or another, not necessarily in terms of racial or cultural homogeneity though. I've seen anarchists on this forum discuss being pro-narcotic and anti-narcotic anarchists. They seem to agree to disagree and suggest that they would live in different communities.

My question is basically this: If a group of Christians wanted to live together in a community and not harm or influence anyone is that in-appropriate? Or is it allowing them to fulfil their own destiny? If it is, how then if a bunch of white guys want to hang out on their own, is that not also allowing them to fulfil their own desires to live in a community of their choice?

As anarchists we talk about allowing people the freedom to live in a community that they choose, this then, includes people who choose to live in either a racially or culturally homogeneous society, whatever their hearts desire. I don’t think it’s fair to say that they aren’t anarchists per se, but rather, they are not our type of anarchist.

This is just as prejudicial as saying that anarcho-capitalists aren’t anarchists or that individualist anarchists aren’t true anarchists. I agree with Per Byland, lets hear what he has to say,

» I welcome the differences that make the discussions go on; they make the discussions interesting.

» I cannot believe that any anarchical society would be that conformist.
» Definitely this would be the absolutist rule of the majority and, thus, the
» antithesis of a free, anarchical society.

What about anarchist law? Isn’t that conformist?

---
Those who would give up an essential liberty for temporary security, deserve neither - BENJAMIN FRANKLIN